new Reade/Biden thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reade is incredible - in every sense of the word. It’s ridiculous.
Read this - it’s a huge meticulously researched and documented compilation of all the crap she’s pulled.
http://ascammersnightmareisjustice.blogspot.com/2020/04/tara-reade-legacy-of-lies-part-one.html?m=1

Omg, her grifting just doesn’t stop. I only got a few paras in and was horrified. I’ll read the rest tonight, after work.

Sure, blame the victim.....how enlightened.

+ 1 million
Remember when doubters of a certain someone were labeled "victim-blamers, rape apologists, women-haters," etc.? That's quite a 180 these hypocrites have managed!

We went back to doubting women because Trump superfan Jacob Wohl paid women to accuse Robert Mueller of rape.
https://www.businessinsider.com/mueller-fbi-investigation-women-offered-money-false-claims-2018-10

Good to know that. Will remember that the next time an R is accused. No matter how many times/threads you post this in.

So we are allowed to doubt a woman who has changed her story more often than she has changed her name, which is a lot, and has defrauded a charity and lied in bankruptcy court? OK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone who supports trump tell me why all of the sudden you are not ok blaming the victim? Don't say liberal hypocrisy. Tell me why this is so important to you now.

We were told last year that all women must be believed and questioning the victim is wrong. What changed?

Total BS. You’ve been told many times to drop the “all” and that unquestioning belief was never guaranteed. You were asked to come up with proof that “all” was widely used beyond the fringe and some actresses, and you came up with one Senator (who later phrased it differently) and a few posters by Senate staff.

Have you no self-respect? Or are you doing this for money?

Here's a direct quote from one of the many threads about you-know-who a couple of years ago. 9/17/2018
"Again, such a level of backlash and intense scrutiny over every aspect of her life?

No one except a truth-telling person would want to put themselves in that position.

And among those, there are very few truth-telling persons who would actually go through with it.

As the MeToo movement has shown, most victims still aren't ready to come out. It's too traumatizing to relive the even and have a number of people calling you names, tearing you apart and disbelieving you.

Therefore I find the accuser credible."

So let me ask you: why did you (or whoever wrote this, obviously someone you agree with) defend with such vigor that particular woman, but not Reade? We'll wait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She said she wasn't wearing hose.

Regardless, no one cares so women should save themselves the trouble of coming forward.

True, unless they're accusing a Republican. Then they should *definitely* come forward and be hailed as a hero!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She said she wasn't wearing hose.

Regardless, no one cares so women should save themselves the trouble of coming forward.

True, unless they're accusing a Republican. Then they should *definitely* come forward and be hailed as a hero!

Robert Mueller is a Republican, and the FBI doubted the accuser Trump superfan Jacob Wohl paid to accuse him of rape.
https://www.businessinsider.com/mueller-fbi-investigation-women-offered-money-false-claims-2018-10

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reade is incredible - in every sense of the word. It’s ridiculous.
Read this - it’s a huge meticulously researched and documented compilation of all the crap she’s pulled.
http://ascammersnightmareisjustice.blogspot.com/2020/04/tara-reade-legacy-of-lies-part-one.html?m=1

Omg, her grifting just doesn’t stop. I only got a few paras in and was horrified. I’ll read the rest tonight, after work.

Sure, blame the victim.....how enlightened.

+ 1 million
Remember when doubters of a certain someone were labeled "victim-blamers, rape apologists, women-haters," etc.? That's quite a 180 these hypocrites have managed!

We went back to doubting women because Trump superfan Jacob Wohl paid women to accuse Robert Mueller of rape.
https://www.businessinsider.com/mueller-fbi-investigation-women-offered-money-false-claims-2018-10

Good to know that. Will remember that the next time an R is accused. No matter how many times/threads you post this in.

So we are allowed to doubt a woman who has changed her story more often than she has changed her name, which is a lot, and has defrauded a charity and lied in bankruptcy court? OK.

Sure, you are allowed to doubt her. I assume you will do the same for the next time an R is accused, because PP says that "we went back to doubting women"....even though the woman in PP's "story" never accused anyone of anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For those of you who were insisting that no one says "believe all women"...well, this sure looks like they do.

+1
I would even say Biden believes more women than the hypocrites on this website do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone who supports trump tell me why all of the sudden you are not ok blaming the victim? Don't say liberal hypocrisy. Tell me why this is so important to you now.

We were told last year that all women must be believed and questioning the victim is wrong. What changed?

Total BS. You’ve been told many times to drop the “all” and that unquestioning belief was never guaranteed. You were asked to come up with proof that “all” was widely used beyond the fringe and some actresses, and you came up with one Senator (who later phrased it differently) and a few posters by Senate staff.

Have you no self-respect? Or are you doing this for money?

Here's a direct quote from one of the many threads about you-know-who a couple of years ago. 9/17/2018
"Again, such a level of backlash and intense scrutiny over every aspect of her life?

No one except a truth-telling person would want to put themselves in that position.

And among those, there are very few truth-telling persons who would actually go through with it.

As the MeToo movement has shown, most victims still aren't ready to come out. It's too traumatizing to relive the even and have a number of people calling you names, tearing you apart and disbelieving you.

Therefore I find the accuser credible."

So let me ask you: why did you (or whoever wrote this, obviously someone you agree with) defend with such vigor that particular woman, but not Reade? We'll wait.

Easy. What pp said about changing her story more often than changing her name, defrauding a charity and lying in bankruptcy court. Also her complete lack of evidence (despite initially claiming she filed about the harassment) and problems with her supposed corroboration (her brother changing his story).

You think we should now believe her despite all this? What a ridiculous straw man of a standard you’re trying to create here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reade is incredible - in every sense of the word. It’s ridiculous.
Read this - it’s a huge meticulously researched and documented compilation of all the crap she’s pulled.
http://ascammersnightmareisjustice.blogspot.com/2020/04/tara-reade-legacy-of-lies-part-one.html?m=1

Omg, her grifting just doesn’t stop. I only got a few paras in and was horrified. I’ll read the rest tonight, after work.

Sure, blame the victim.....how enlightened.

+ 1 million
Remember when doubters of a certain someone were labeled "victim-blamers, rape apologists, women-haters," etc.? That's quite a 180 these hypocrites have managed!

We went back to doubting women because Trump superfan Jacob Wohl paid women to accuse Robert Mueller of rape.
https://www.businessinsider.com/mueller-fbi-investigation-women-offered-money-false-claims-2018-10

Good to know that. Will remember that the next time an R is accused. No matter how many times/threads you post this in.

So we are allowed to doubt a woman who has changed her story more often than she has changed her name, which is a lot, and has defrauded a charity and lied in bankruptcy court? OK.

Sure, you are allowed to doubt her. I assume you will do the same for the next time an R is accused, because PP says that "we went back to doubting women"....even though the woman in PP's "story" never accused anyone of anything.

Um, yes she did. With signed statements and a news conference and everything. And why did you put “story” in quotes?

“But those "real allegations" appear to be even more problematic. At the news conference, Wohl distributed a document that was digitally signed, purportedly by the absent accuser Carolyne Cass, in which she said she had been sexually assaulted by Mueller in New York in 2010. In the interview this month, Wohl referred to Cass as a "real accuser" and called her allegations credible.“
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/26/robert-mueller-hoax-how-jacob-wohl-created-sexual-harassment-plot/2993799002/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For those of you who were insisting that no one says "believe all women"...well, this sure looks like they do.

+1
I would even say Biden believes more women than the hypocrites on this website do.

Since when does “presume she’s telling the truth” equate to “believe all women, regardless”?

Top pp, is English your native language?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For those of you who were insisting that no one says "believe all women"...well, this sure looks like they do.

+1
I would even say Biden believes more women than the hypocrites on this website do.

The hypocrites are the ones who have never believed what to dozen women have said about Trump, but hang on this woman’s every word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Shocking alternative! These deadenders aren’t actually Democrats, and they used Bernie as a vehicle, not actually supporters. They’re Green-disaffiliated-bombthrower-malcontents-trolls. That frame explains literally everything from 2016 forward.

Pp here. Yep, this has totally occurred to me.

Also that these could be Cons pretending to impersonate Dems. Just the other week a Con was pretending to be a gun-loving Dem and only outed himself when he got outraged that someone called Fox “faux.” I even mentioned this in a Website Feedback thread and the con, who was also participating there, didn’t bother to deny it in front of the moderator.

I’ve been tempted to ask the moderator about this poster. I’m sure he doesn’t want paid con social media operatives on his site. But there’s an equally good chance that this pp, like Tara, is just a disappointed Bernie Bro or Green flame-thrower who thinks undermining democracy is OK so long as it’s within the Dem party.

Weird that nobody has come on to deny this. “I’m not a con/green/Bernie Bro! I’m just a regular Dem, just like you, who’s concerned about the future of my party.”

Weird that you haven't noticed that people who HAVE said just that and been shot down by those of you insisting they couldn't possibly be "just a regular Dem" if they didn't want Biden as the candidate. Plenty of "regular Dems" think Biden is a poor choice. Deal with it.

He wasn’t my choice (I voted for Warren), but he’s who your fellow Democrats selected. It’s him or fascism. It’s understanding that the GOP will be telling lie after lie about Biden and it’s up to us, as Jeff Winger says in Community, season 3 episode 19: “stop letting him make you realize stuff!” It’s all going to be lies. Support Biden or say goodbye to the promise of America.

Oh, my. I see a direct correlation between the amount of hyperbole you guys use and your rising panic. It's so evident, but also... kind of funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Shocking alternative! These deadenders aren’t actually Democrats, and they used Bernie as a vehicle, not actually supporters. They’re Green-disaffiliated-bombthrower-malcontents-trolls. That frame explains literally everything from 2016 forward.

Pp here. Yep, this has totally occurred to me.

Also that these could be Cons pretending to impersonate Dems. Just the other week a Con was pretending to be a gun-loving Dem and only outed himself when he got outraged that someone called Fox “faux.” I even mentioned this in a Website Feedback thread and the con, who was also participating there, didn’t bother to deny it in front of the moderator.

I’ve been tempted to ask the moderator about this poster. I’m sure he doesn’t want paid con social media operatives on his site. But there’s an equally good chance that this pp, like Tara, is just a disappointed Bernie Bro or Green flame-thrower who thinks undermining democracy is OK so long as it’s within the Dem party.

Weird that nobody has come on to deny this. “I’m not a con/green/Bernie Bro! I’m just a regular Dem, just like you, who’s concerned about the future of my party.”

Weird that you haven't noticed that people who HAVE said just that and been shot down by those of you insisting they couldn't possibly be "just a regular Dem" if they didn't want Biden as the candidate. Plenty of "regular Dems" think Biden is a poor choice. Deal with it.

What’s wrong with you? Nothing better to do than bump old cr@p? Get a life.

I was responding to a post from TODAY at 1:30. That's old? May I ask: what is wrong with YOU? You seriously need to get out of the house. Being cooped up does you no favors in the personality department.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reade is incredible - in every sense of the word. It’s ridiculous.
Read this - it’s a huge meticulously researched and documented compilation of all the crap she’s pulled.
http://ascammersnightmareisjustice.blogspot.com/2020/04/tara-reade-legacy-of-lies-part-one.html?m=1

Omg, her grifting just doesn’t stop. I only got a few paras in and was horrified. I’ll read the rest tonight, after work.

Sure, blame the victim.....how enlightened.

+ 1 million
Remember when doubters of a certain someone were labeled "victim-blamers, rape apologists, women-haters," etc.? That's quite a 180 these hypocrites have managed!

We went back to doubting women because Trump superfan Jacob Wohl paid women to accuse Robert Mueller of rape.
https://www.businessinsider.com/mueller-fbi-investigation-women-offered-money-false-claims-2018-10

Good to know that. Will remember that the next time an R is accused. No matter how many times/threads you post this in.

So we are allowed to doubt a woman who has changed her story more often than she has changed her name, which is a lot, and has defrauded a charity and lied in bankruptcy court? OK.

Sure, you are allowed to doubt her. I assume you will do the same for the next time an R is accused, because PP says that "we went back to doubting women"....even though the woman in PP's "story" never accused anyone of anything.

Um, yes she did. With signed statements and a news conference and everything. And why did you put “story” in quotes?

“But those "real allegations" appear to be even more problematic. At the news conference, Wohl distributed a document that was digitally signed, purportedly by the absent accuser Carolyne Cass, in which she said she had been sexually assaulted by Mueller in New York in 2010. In the interview this month, Wohl referred to Cass as a "real accuser" and called her allegations credible.“
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/26/robert-mueller-hoax-how-jacob-wohl-created-sexual-harassment-plot/2993799002/

So, now you are going to doubt women because of this false accusation? What will you do the next time an R is accused? Will you also doubt that one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reade is incredible - in every sense of the word. It’s ridiculous.
Read this - it’s a huge meticulously researched and documented compilation of all the crap she’s pulled.
http://ascammersnightmareisjustice.blogspot.com/2020/04/tara-reade-legacy-of-lies-part-one.html?m=1

That blogger sounds psychotic.

+100
I couldn't even get through that post. Sounds like a crackpot on the verge of a breakdown.

You mean Reade, right?

Pp must mean Reade. The blog was meticulously researched and documented.

By whom? Once again, who is the blogger and why should we place any credence in what they're churning out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

For those of you who were insisting that no one says "believe all women"...well, this sure looks like they do.

+1
I would even say Biden believes more women than the hypocrites on this website do.

Since when does “presume she’s telling the truth” equate to “believe all women, regardless”?

Top pp, is English your native language?

Ok, I'll bite. What do YOU think Biden was saying in this quote? What qualifier is present in his statement?